Falcon 9 Mission & Launch Success Records

[butters]

The only thing abnormal here is that these records stood for so long, attesting to the terrible stagnation that overtook the aerospace industry.

All we do is compare everything to the Apollo program...  Where else is this normal?  What other industry still holds the accomplishments of the 60s in awe and whispers quietly that one day, maybe...

The kind of progress SpaceX is making should have could have would have happened 20 years earlier at the very least.

Generation lost.

Glad we're finding it now, but it's still singular. I hope it'll become the norm again at some point.

Meh.

There was no need.   Also, spacecraft were lasting longer

I call this period the "geosynchronous lull." After film-based spysats and before large LEO constellations, the bread-and-butter segment of the launch industry was geosynchronous comsats, which had long lifetimes and large coverage areas and therefore generated insufficient demand to support a vibrant launch industry. As we know, global launch rates peaked in 1967, dropped off substantially during the geosynchronous lull, and finally blasted past that old record into uncharted territory in 2021 and 2022.

The original concept of operations for New Glenn is an instructive example of how even a "progressive" launch provider viewed the launch market in the early-mid 2010s: Blue Origin projected 8 dual-manifest GTO launches per year. Essentially Ariane 5, but with a reusable booster and presumably cheaper. Reusability was not seen as empowering cadence, because Blue didn't foresee the demand for higher cadence.

Blue obviously hired consultants that gave them a very sober and realistic market projection based on how the industry had worked throughout their entire careers during the lull. They didn't want to be like Boeing, building the Decatur plant with the capacity to assemble 50 Delta IV cores per year on the hopes that a market would materialize. Boeing also got burned by their investment in Sea Launch, which could be described as the launch provider most specifically tailored to addressing the market of the geosynchronous lull.

The lull is over, and everybody who based their business model on the lull has been caught out. ULA will build a second VIF at LC-41 to partially compensate for their poorly-timed decision to decommission half their pads. Ariane has no realistic near-term path toward high-rate launch operations. New Glenn is going through yet another round of design pivots. It wasn't that they didn't believe that 60+ launches a year would be possible, it's that they didn't think it would be needed. They were wrong.

[AmigaClone]

I can't see Falcon 9 surpassing some records of the R-7 family, especially the total number of launches of specific members of that family, such as total number of launches.

I also can't see SpaceX refurbishing a pad fast enough to launch twice within 50 hours - which the Soviet Union managed to do (in one case in 1969).

Falcon 9 won’t be operating long enough at current rates to surpass the >1000 launches record for the R7 family. Starship will take over the vast majority and eventually they’ll retire Falcon 9.

But why don’t you think they could “refurbish” a pad fast enough to turn around in 50 hours? Seems challenging, but not particularly groundbreaking compared to what they’ve already achieved. After all, as you say, the Soviets did it.

Maybe they just will never bother, but I don’t see any particular challenge to it.

Part of the reason I can't see Space launching twice from the same pad in 50 hours would be them simply not bothering to attempt that feat. I can also see government red tape being a major factor in preventing SpaceX from even considering making that type of attempt with a Falcon 9 (especially having two crewed missions from the Falcon 9 pad at LC39A).

[Surfdaddy]

We could also talk about a stat that the airlines use - "dispatch reliability". In other words, what percent of the time does the F9 launch on the first try? I would assume we don't factor weather scrubs into that answer. And of course F9's launch windows are instantaneous which is a further difficulty for them. I can hardly remember any F9 scrubbing due to a mechanical issue lately, even though most of their launches are on flight proven boosters. I would suggest (without having the data) that the F9, let's say since Block 5, is by far the most reliable launcher to launch on the first try, disregarding weather scrubs.

Anybody want to gather that data?

[Robotbeat]

I can't see Falcon 9 surpassing some records of the R-7 family, especially the total number of launches of specific members of that family, such as total number of launches.

I also can't see SpaceX refurbishing a pad fast enough to launch twice within 50 hours - which the Soviet Union managed to do (in one case in 1969).

Falcon 9 won’t be operating long enough at current rates to surpass the >1000 launches record for the R7 family. Starship will take over the vast majority and eventually they’ll retire Falcon 9.

But why don’t you think they could “refurbish” a pad fast enough to turn around in 50 hours? Seems challenging, but not particularly groundbreaking compared to what they’ve already achieved. After all, as you say, the Soviets did it.

Maybe they just will never bother, but I don’t see any particular challenge to it.

Part of the reason I can't see Space launching twice from the same pad in 50 hours would be them simply not bothering to attempt that feat. I can also see government red tape being a major factor in preventing SpaceX from even considering making that type of attempt with a Falcon 9 (especially having two crewed missions from the Falcon 9 pad at LC39A).

I can see them doing it for a couple of back to back Starlink launches from LC-40. They did 8 days between launches earlier this month. A bit over 2 days between launches is well within the realm of the possible.

[meekGee]

The only thing abnormal here is that these records stood for so long, attesting to the terrible stagnation that overtook the aerospace industry.

All we do is compare everything to the Apollo program...  Where else is this normal?  What other industry still holds the accomplishments of the 60s in awe and whispers quietly that one day, maybe...

The kind of progress SpaceX is making should have could have would have happened 20 years earlier at the very least.

Generation lost.

Glad we're finding it now, but it's still singular. I hope it'll become the norm again at some point.

Meh.

There was no need.   Also, spacecraft were lasting longer

...
There was a major slump in orbital launches worldwide between 2001 and 2005 caused by several factors. 2004 only saw 50 successful orbital launches globally. The four most used families (Delta, Long March, R-7 (which includes Soyuz) and Proton rockets launched a combined total of 32 times.

These two quotes embody what I'm talking about.  The launch providers didn't have any drive or interest in creating a space economy.  They blame the market (which is what weak passive CEOs do) but don't do anything about it.  THe CEOs job IS to create the market for the company, or transition the company towards where the market is.

Meanwhile the companies stagnate and lose the ability to do anything except the very narrow niche into which they maneuvered themselves.  Look at ULA's response to SpaceX.  First it was all about block buys and just securing the government manifest.  Then, forced to do something by the the RD180 ban (and my god this was the first time congress showed foresight) they came up with Vulcan - basically the absolute minimum effort they could think of. An upgraded EELV with engines from a vendor of last resort.

Blaming the longer life of comm-sats (or "the slump") for the misfortunes of the launch industry is just excuses - as was proven by SpaceX.

[FutureSpaceTourist]

Should note here that with the 48th F9 launch this year (all successful), of Starlink 4-36 on 20 October, F9 has set a new annual record for most launches of the same vehicle type. Previous record was 47 launches (45 successful) in 1979 by Soyuz-U.

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1583133885696987136

Congrats to @SpaceX team on 48th launch this year! Falcon 9 now holds record for most launches of a single vehicle type in a year.

[AmigaClone]

Should note here that with the 48th F9 launch this year (all successful), of Starlink 4-36 on 20 October, F9 has set a new annual record for most launches of the same vehicle type. Previous record was 47 launches (45 successful) in 1979 by Soyuz-U.

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1583133885696987136

Congrats to @SpaceX team on 48th launch this year! Falcon 9 now holds record for most launches of a single vehicle type in a year.

Something to note is that two of those Soyuz-2 launch attempts in 1979 were failures.

The most launches by a rocket family was in 1980 when there where 63 launches of the R7 family (45 Soyuz-U, 12 Molniya-M, and 6 Vostok-2M) Two of the Molniya-M rockets were partial failures. Not included in the previous total of launches was a Vostok-2M which exploded on the launch pad while being serviced.

[FutureSpaceTourist]

Another record (payload to orbit) for SpaceX already this year:

Delta V adjusted payload totals after today’s Starlink launch:


733,100 (61x) 🇺🇸 United States
633,173 (48x) 🇺🇸 (SpaceX)
144,326 (43x) 🇨🇳 China
74,848 (15x) 🇷🇺 Russia
40,511 (3x) 🇪🇺 Europe
2,928 (2x) 🇮🇳 India
2,199 (1x) 🇰🇷 South Korea
1,315 (8x) 🇳🇿 New Zealand
15 (1x) 🇮🇷 Iran

1,001,149 🇺🇳 (131x) Earth

Not only has the US beaten the record set in 1988 by the USSR for most adjusted payload to orbit, but SpaceX alone has cleared that record by itself with more than two months to go!